subject:"\[PSES\] NEC 2017"

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-28 Thread Brian O'Connell

Mr Perkins,

Aware of the article 725 changes and other code stuff that would track this?

Brian

From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 10:47 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Mike, et al,

   Thanx for looking up the specific NEC updates for the new 
edition.  

   Having a 50V limit like the Euro LVD seems like a good 
harmonization effort.  

   However, within TC108 we’re identifying a number of issues for 
ELV power distribution to other equipment (e.g. POE or 100W USB, etc.) to be 
safely used.  There will be additional requirements for these schemes for them 
to be used safely and it will be part of the certification process under the 
standards.  

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

p.perk...@ieee.org

From: msherma...@comcast.net [mailto:msherma...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 5:15 PM
To: Pete Perkins <peperkin...@cs.com>
Cc: EMC-PSTC <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Pete --

Thanks for the suggestion. I looked on the NFPA.org website at the NFPA 70 
draft dated 4-8-2016 and there is a new section 422.6: 
"422.6 Listing Required
All appliances operating at 50 volts or more shall be listed."

The definition for "Listed" in article 100 of NFPA 70 is complicated (too much 
to re-type here) but: 1) sounds like an NRTL; 2) does not specifically use the 
term NRTL.

The definition for "Appliance" in article 100 of NFPA 100 starts off: 
"Utilization equipment, generally other than industrial..." and gives a few 
examples that could be either household or commercial (e.g., washing machine, 
air conditioning units, food mixers, deep fryers). Hard to tell the intent of 
the changes here.

I'm guessing from the format that both "Listed" and "Appliance" definitions are 
being tweaked this time around, but have not checked this against the 2014 
version.

Mike Sherman
Graco Inc.

From: "Pete Perkins" <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
To: "EMC-PSTC" <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 11:35:43 AM
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Doug, et al,

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.  

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.  

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

p.perk...@ieee.org

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

Thanks,  Doug

Douglas E Powell
Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute <ri...@ieee.org> wrote:

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.  

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.  

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

Rich

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott D

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-28 Thread Pete Perkins

Mike, et al,

 

   Thanx for looking up the specific NEC updates for the new 
edition.  

 

   Having a 50V limit like the Euro LVD seems like a good 
harmonization effort.  

 

   However, within TC108 we’re identifying a number of issues for 
ELV power distribution to other equipment (e.g. POE or 100W USB, etc.) to be 
safely used.  There will be additional requirements for these schemes for them 
to be used safely and it will be part of the certification process under the 
standards.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: msherma...@comcast.net [mailto:msherma...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 5:15 PM
To: Pete Perkins <peperkin...@cs.com>
Cc: EMC-PSTC <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Pete --

 

Thanks for the suggestion. I looked on the NFPA.org website at the NFPA 70 
draft dated 4-8-2016 and there is a new section 422.6: 

"422.6 Listing Required

All appliances operating at 50 volts or more shall be listed."

 

The definition for "Listed" in article 100 of NFPA 70 is complicated (too much 
to re-type here) but: 1) sounds like an NRTL; 2) does not specifically use the 
term NRTL.

 

The definition for "Appliance" in article 100 of NFPA 100 starts off: 
"Utilization equipment, generally other than industrial..." and gives a few 
examples that could be either household or commercial (e.g., washing machine, 
air conditioning units, food mixers, deep fryers). Hard to tell the intent of 
the changes here.

 

I'm guessing from the format that both "Listed" and "Appliance" definitions are 
being tweaked this time around, but have not checked this against the 2014 
version.

 

Mike Sherman

Graco Inc.

 

  _  

From: "Pete Perkins" <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org 
<mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> >
To: "EMC-PSTC" <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> >
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 11:35:43 AM
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Doug, et al,

 

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.  

 

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

 

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

 

Thanks,  Doug

 

 

Douglas E Powell

Colorado USA

 <mailto:doug...@gmail.com> doug...@gmail.com

 <http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute <ri...@ieee.org 
<mailto:ri...@ieee.org> > wrote:

 

 

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.  

 

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.  

 

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

 

 

Rich

 

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.i

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-27 Thread IBM Ken

FYI, NFPA members can subscribe to get email updates:



[image: Header]

We've made changes to the document information page for NFPA 70, *National
Electrical Code®*
Take a look at: NFPA 70, *National Electrical Code®*
<http://www.nfpa.org/70>


*2017 edition:*

*Posted under Next Edition tab:*
Amendment Ballot:  Final, Amendments 70-3, 70-7, 70-14, 70-22,
70-23, 70-25, 70-27, 70-29 and 70-41
TIA Ballot: Finals, TIA No. 1234


Please do not reply to this e-mail

NFPA • One Batterymarch Park • Quincy • Massachusetts • 02169-7471 • USA

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Mike Sherman - Original Message - <
msherma...@comcast.net> wrote:

> Pete --
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. I looked on the NFPA.org website at the NFPA 70
> draft dated 4-8-2016 and there is a new section 422.6:
> "422.6 Listing Required
> All appliances operating at 50 volts or more shall be listed."
>
> The definition for "Listed" in article 100 of NFPA 70 is complicated (too
> much to re-type here) but: 1) sounds like an NRTL; 2) does not specifically
> use the term NRTL.
>
> The definition for "Appliance" in article 100 of NFPA 100 starts off:
> "Utilization equipment, generally other than industrial..." and gives a few
> examples that could be either household or commercial (e.g., washing
> machine, air conditioning units, food mixers, deep fryers). Hard to tell
> the intent of the changes here.
>
> I'm guessing from the format that both "Listed" and "Appliance"
> definitions are being tweaked this time around, but have not checked this
> against the 2014 version.
>
> Mike Sherman
> Graco Inc.
>
> --
> *From: *"Pete Perkins" <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
> *To: *"EMC-PSTC" <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, July 26, 2016 11:35:43 AM
>
> *Subject: *Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>
> Doug, et al,
>
>
>
>If you were really interested you would be involved in the
> committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the
> pertinent changes in which you are interested.
>
>
>
>All of these changes are done in an open forum and the
> documents seem available; I don’t follow them, however.
>
>
>
> :>) br,  Pete
>
>
>
> Peter E Perkins, PE
>
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
>
> PO Box 23427
>
> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
>
>
>
> 503/452-1201
>
>
>
> p.perk...@ieee.org
>
>
>
> *From:* Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>
>
>
> Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?
>
>
>
> I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.
>
>
>
> Thanks,  Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> Douglas E Powell
>
> Colorado USA
>
> doug...@gmail.com
>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute <ri...@ieee.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state
> AHJs.  In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and
> add some requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what
> “listing” means – what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local
> or state AHJ.  The NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party
> certifier.
>
>
>
> AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state
> rules.  A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently
> acceptable.
>
>
>
> Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how
> the local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as
> does OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives
> than OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rich
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> 
>
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
> emc-p...@ieee.org
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
> Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
> Instructions: http://w

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Mike Sherman ----- Original Message -----

Pete -- 

Thanks for the suggestion. I looked on the NFPA.org website at the NFPA 70 
draft dated 4-8-2016 and there is a new section 422.6: 
"422.6 Listing Required 
All appliances operating at 50 volts or more shall be listed." 

The definition for "Listed" in article 100 of NFPA 70 is complicated (too much 
to re-type here) but: 1) sounds like an NRTL; 2) does not specifically use the 
term NRTL. 

The definition for "Appliance" in article 100 of NFPA 100 starts off: 
"Utilization equipment, generally other than industrial..." and gives a few 
examples that could be either household or commercial (e.g., washing machine, 
air conditioning units, food mixers, deep fryers). Hard to tell the intent of 
the changes here. 

I'm guessing from the format that both "Listed" and "Appliance" definitions are 
being tweaked this time around, but have not checked this against the 2014 
version. 

Mike Sherman 
Graco Inc. 

- Original Message -

From: "Pete Perkins" <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> 
To: "EMC-PSTC" <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 11:35:43 AM 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017 



Doug, et al, 



If you were really interested you would be involved in the committee that 
revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the pertinent changes in 
which you are interested. 



All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents seem 
available; I don’t follow them, however. 



:>) br, Pete 



Peter E Perkins, PE 

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant 

PO Box 23427 

Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 



503/452-1201 



p.perk...@ieee.org 



From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM 
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017 




Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed? 





I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages. 





Thanks, Doug 








Douglas E Powell 


Colorado USA 


doug...@gmail.com 


http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 





On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute < ri...@ieee.org > wrote: 








The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements. In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means – 
what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ. The NEC 
has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier. 



AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable. 



Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs. Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program. 





Rich 






- 
 

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to  
emc-p...@ieee.org  

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html 

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc. 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 
Scott Douglas  sdoug...@ieee.org  
Mike Cantwell  mcantw...@ieee.org  

For policy questions, send mail to: 
Jim Bacher  j.bac...@ieee.org  
David Heald  dhe...@gmail.com  












-- 





Douglas E Powell 

doug...@gmail.com 
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 




- 
 

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to < 
emc-p...@ieee.org > 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html 

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc. 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 
Scott Douglas < sdoug...@ieee.org > 
Mike Cantwell < mcan

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Pete Perkins

Thanx to Joe and all for the comments, 

 

   With Joe’s explanation I now know 2 people who follow the NEC 
changes regularly; it doesn’t seem to be too common in this circle.  But my 
earlier point remains, it is possible to keep up with these changes by being 
part of the process.  

 

   I agree with the ongoing comments showing that each of the more 
than 10k Jurisdictions adopt the NEC on their own conditions.  The City of LA 
has always had a long list of delta’s with the code; perhaps that was their way 
of pushing for changes that they thought needed.   Within each Jurisdiction 
each AHJ inspector has their own short list of hot button issues to contend 
with.  I have smoothed over installation safety conflicts by arranging a 
meeting with the AHJ inspector, preferably at the equipment/jobsite to get 
agreement on what has to be done then working with the equipment supplier to 
get the work in place and properly identified as being adequate and walking the 
inspector thru the completed work to get agreement.  

 

   From a foreign outsiders point of view this is all confusing.  
Any company getting involved in selling electrical products in the US must come 
up to speed as quickly as possible in order to avoid getting stopped selling or 
installing their equipment here.  

 

   Harmonization of technical requirement over the last 30+ years 
has been helpful for the classes of equipment that have participated; the 
understanding of the specific country requirements and certification procedures 
has gotten more complicated.  This has been a recurring IEEE ISPCE conference 
theme.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:20 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

As far as I know in North Carolina the NEC is adopted by version so the 2017 
version will not apply until specifically adopted.  NC usually waits a few 
years after the initial release for things to shake out before adopting the 
latest.  And I believe the local inspector in NC has authority to accept or 
require what he wants regardless of the NEC.

 

-Dave

 

From: Scott Douglas [mailto:sdouglas...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:44 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of 
specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption law to 
allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what exactly was 
adopted.

 

On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph" <j...@randolph-telecom.com 
<mailto:j...@randolph-telecom.com> > wrote:

Hi Pete:

 

Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.

 

For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017 
edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840, 
“Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft of 
the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for $175, 
but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly affected 
a project I was working on.  

 

While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer 
screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything more 
than what is on the screen.

 

In summary, it *is* possible to see the draft version as it develops, but it 
requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I believe the 
final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.

 

On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction adopts 
NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a specific 
edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was looking at this, 
the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005 edition of NFPA 70.   
This seems problematic for dealing with changes in the NEC over time.

 

I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition of 
NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the local 
jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:

 

1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

 

Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the specific 
individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to pick and choose 
from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.  It certainly would 
create a lot of

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Nyffenegger, Dave

As far as I know in North Carolina the NEC is adopted by version so the 2017 
version will not apply until specifically adopted.  NC usually waits a few 
years after the initial release for things to shake out before adopting the 
latest.  And I believe the local inspector in NC has authority to accept or 
require what he wants regardless of the NEC.

-Dave

From: Scott Douglas [mailto:sdouglas...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:44 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017


Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of 
specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption law to 
allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what exactly was 
adopted.

On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph" 
<j...@randolph-telecom.com<mailto:j...@randolph-telecom.com>> wrote:
Hi Pete:

Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.

For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017 
edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840, 
“Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft of 
the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for $175, 
but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly affected 
a project I was working on.

While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer 
screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything more 
than what is on the screen.

In summary, it *is* possible to see the draft version as it develops, but it 
requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I believe the 
final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.

On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction adopts 
NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a specific 
edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was looking at this, 
the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005 edition of NFPA 70.   
This seems problematic for dealing with changes in the NEC over time.

I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition of 
NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the local 
jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:


1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the specific 
individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to pick and choose 
from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.  It certainly would 
create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying to deploy a single 
product throughout the USA.


Joe Randolph
Telecom Design Consultant
Randolph Telecom, Inc.
781-721-2848 (USA)
j...@randolph-telecom.com<mailto:j...@randolph-telecom.com>
http://www.randolph-telecom.com

From: Pete Perkins 
[mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org<mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Doug, et al,

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201<tel:503%2F452-1201>

p.perk...@ieee.org<mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org>

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

Thanks,  Doug


Douglas E Powell
Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com<mailto:doug...@gmail.com>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute 
<ri...@ieee.org<mailto:ri...@ieee.org>> wrote:


The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Scott Aldous

...and there are jurisdictions on a level smaller than state that can adopt
a version as well, such as counties and even cities.

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Scott Douglas <sdouglas...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of
> specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption
> law to allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what
> exactly was adopted.
>
> On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph" <j...@randolph-telecom.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Pete:
>>
>>
>>
>> Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.
>>
>>
>>
>> For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017
>> edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840,
>> “Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft
>> of the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for
>> $175, but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly
>> affected a project I was working on.
>>
>>
>>
>> While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my
>> computer screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy
>> anything more than what is on the screen.
>>
>>
>>
>> In summary, it **is** possible to see the draft version as it develops,
>> but it requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I
>> believe the final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.
>>
>>
>>
>> On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction
>> adopts NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a
>> specific edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was
>> looking at this, the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005
>> edition of NFPA 70.   This seems problematic for dealing with changes in
>> the NEC over time.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an
>> edition of NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of
>> the local jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the
>> edition called out in the legislation
>>
>> 2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the
>> edition called out in the legislation
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the
>> specific individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to
>> pick and choose from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.
>> It certainly would create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying
>> to deploy a single product throughout the USA.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe Randolph
>>
>> Telecom Design Consultant
>>
>> Randolph Telecom, Inc.
>>
>> 781-721-2848 (USA)
>>
>> j...@randolph-telecom.com
>>
>> http://www.randolph-telecom.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
>> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>>
>>
>>
>> Doug, et al,
>>
>>
>>
>>If you were really interested you would be involved in the
>> committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the
>> pertinent changes in which you are interested.
>>
>>
>>
>>All of these changes are done in an open forum and the
>> documents seem available; I don’t follow them, however.
>>
>>
>>
>> :>) br,  Pete
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter E Perkins, PE
>>
>> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
>>
>> PO Box 23427
>>
>> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
>>
>>
>>
>> 503/452-1201
>>
>>
>>
>> p.perk...@ieee.org
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com <doug...@gmail.com>]
>> *Sent:* Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
>> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>>
>>
>>
>> Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?
>>
>>
>>
>> I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,  Doug
>>
>>
&g

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Scott Douglas

Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of
specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption
law to allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what
exactly was adopted.

On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph" <j...@randolph-telecom.com> wrote:

> Hi Pete:
>
>
>
> Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.
>
>
>
> For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017
> edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840,
> “Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft
> of the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for
> $175, but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly
> affected a project I was working on.
>
>
>
> While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer
> screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything
> more than what is on the screen.
>
>
>
> In summary, it **is** possible to see the draft version as it develops,
> but it requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I
> believe the final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.
>
>
>
> On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction
> adopts NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a
> specific edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was
> looking at this, the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005
> edition of NFPA 70.   This seems problematic for dealing with changes in
> the NEC over time.
>
>
>
> I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition
> of NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the
> local jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:
>
>
>
> 1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the
> edition called out in the legislation
>
> 2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the
> edition called out in the legislation
>
>
>
> Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the
> specific individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to
> pick and choose from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.
> It certainly would create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying
> to deploy a single product throughout the USA.
>
>
>
>
>
> Joe Randolph
>
> Telecom Design Consultant
>
> Randolph Telecom, Inc.
>
> 781-721-2848 (USA)
>
> j...@randolph-telecom.com
>
> http://www.randolph-telecom.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>
>
>
> Doug, et al,
>
>
>
>If you were really interested you would be involved in the
> committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the
> pertinent changes in which you are interested.
>
>
>
>All of these changes are done in an open forum and the
> documents seem available; I don’t follow them, however.
>
>
>
> :>) br,  Pete
>
>
>
> Peter E Perkins, PE
>
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
>
> PO Box 23427
>
> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
>
>
>
> 503/452-1201
>
>
>
> p.perk...@ieee.org
>
>
>
> *From:* Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com <doug...@gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>
>
>
> Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?
>
>
>
> I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.
>
>
>
> Thanks,  Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> Douglas E Powell
>
> Colorado USA
>
> doug...@gmail.com
>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute <ri...@ieee.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state
> AHJs.  In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and
> add some requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what
> “listing” means – what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local
> or state AHJ.  The NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party
> certifier.
>
>
>
> AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state
> rules.  A specific NRTL certification m

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Joe Randolph

Hi Pete:

 

Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.

 

For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017 
edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840, 
“Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft of 
the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for $175, 
but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly affected 
a project I was working on.  

 

While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer 
screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything more 
than what is on the screen.

 

In summary, it *is* possible to see the draft version as it develops, but it 
requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I believe the 
final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.

 

On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction adopts 
NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a specific 
edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was looking at this, 
the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005 edition of NFPA 70.   
This seems problematic for dealing with changes in the NEC over time.

 

I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition of 
NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the local 
jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:

 

1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

 

Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the specific 
individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to pick and choose 
from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.  It certainly would 
create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying to deploy a single 
product throughout the USA.

 

 

Joe Randolph

Telecom Design Consultant

Randolph Telecom, Inc.

781-721-2848 (USA)

 <mailto:j...@randolph-telecom.com> j...@randolph-telecom.com

 <http://www.randolph-telecom.com> http://www.randolph-telecom.com

 

From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Doug, et al,

 

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.  

 

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

 

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

 

Thanks,  Doug

 

 

Douglas E Powell

Colorado USA

 <mailto:doug...@gmail.com> doug...@gmail.com

 <http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute <ri...@ieee.org 
<mailto:ri...@ieee.org> > wrote:

 

 

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.  

 

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.  

 

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

 

 

Rich

 

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
ht

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Pete Perkins

CR, etal,

Ok, so now you are mixing in additional regulatory requirements - FCC - 
on top of the safety requirements we have been discussing.  

So now, since they have been alerted HD will no longer sell items that 
do not meet the FCC emissions requirements - watch for the announcement.  

By the way, there are many other US regulatory requirements that are 
out there and they are not uniformly applied across the US.   Energy efficiency 
comes to mind; the state  of California is really on top of this one.  

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

p.perk...@ieee.org

-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond [mailto:k...@earthlink.net] 
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

On 7/23/2016 10:07 AM, Brian Gregory wrote:
> Another is to research Home Depot's buyer's guide:  I believe they 
> somewhere say in writing that they'll not sell non-approved plug-in 
> appliances.

They do, however, readily sell DIY FCC-non-compliant lighting fixtures.

Cortland Richmond

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Pete Perkins

Doug, et al,

 

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.  

 

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

 

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

 

Thanks,  Doug

 

 

Douglas E Powell

Colorado USA

 <mailto:doug...@gmail.com> doug...@gmail.com

 <http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute <ri...@ieee.org 
<mailto:ri...@ieee.org> > wrote:

 

 

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.  

 

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.  

 

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

 

 

Rich

 

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> 
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> 
David Heald dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>  





 

-- 

 

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com <mailto:doug...@gmail.com> 
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-23 Thread Richard Nute

 

 

When I worked at an NRTL, a story circulated
(veracity never verified, but useful for hawking
testing services) about a person in Oregon who
purchased a non-approved exercise stroller
appliance from overseas via the Internet.  It
subsequently caught fire and burned the house
down.

 

The story goes that the insurance company found
out all about the source of the fire, and thence
in either its by-laws or state code a prohibition
of non-approved appliances and was able to legally
refuse payment.

 

Very likely at least partly true.  Here in Oregon,
we have a law (electrical code) that states that
all electrical stuff, both building materials and
appliances, must be certified.  I don’t know about
the insurance company denying coverage.  Many
insurance companies will look for some way to deny
coverage and retain money.  My Dad, who was a fire
insurance underwriter, is rolling in his grave.  

 

 

Rich

 

 

 

 

From: Brian Gregory
[mailto:brian_greg...@netzero.net] 
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 7:07 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

 

Let's also remember that there are categories of
Listed products at companies like UL, CSA and
Intertek:  including 'recognized' and 'approved.'
The difference is out of scope for this
discussion.  The proper phrase from a legal
standpoint IMO, should be approved and not
"listed."  As such, listed, recognized or
approved, are all "approved" appliances.  It's
what I always used.

 

I'll say that AHJ's aren't often in the position
of inspecting plugged-in units,  My experience
suggests that only happens when there's been some
sort of problem, and also the person who has had
an AHJ called on them is likely the type who's too
lazy to unplug things and generally tidy up for an
inspection.

 

In regards to Mr. Eckert's question:

 

"whether there has been a problem with products
being released with a Listing mark from a test lab
that does not have NRTL approval"

 

When I worked at an NRTL, a story circulated
(veracity never verified, but useful for hawking
testing services) about a person in Oregon who
purchased a non-approved exercise stroller
appliance from overseas via the Internet.  It
subsequently caught fire and burned the house
down.

 

The story goes that the insurance company found
out all about the source of the fire, and thence
in either its by-laws or state code a prohibition
of non-approved appliances and was able to legally
refuse payment.

 

So, that's an example.  Another is to research
Home Depot's buyer's guide:  I believe they
somewhere say in writing that they'll not sell
non-approved plug-in appliances.

 

happy weekend all,

 

Colorado Brian

 



-- Original Message --
From: Ted Eckert
<07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org
<mailto:07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> >
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 16:08:54 +

I concur with Mr. Perkin’s assessment. The NEC has
used the term “Listed” for quite a while without
specifically connecting it to the NRTL program. It
only had to be a “Listing” acceptable to the local
AHJ, which almost always meant NRTL Listed. I
believe the intent of is to clarify the intent of
current practice.

 

In regards to Mr. Powell’s comments; the AHJ will
normally sign off before many plug-connected
appliances are installed. Most of the AHJ
inspection will cover appliances attached to
building structure which are largely covered by
the NRTL program. There are installations where
this will be a problem as noted below. However, I
don’t expect most AHJs to know which products are
covered by the NRTL program and which are not. The
AHJ will likely accept an approval mark by a test
lab in the NRTL program even if that test lab
doesn’t have the standard for that product within
the scope of their NRTL registration. 

 

The question I have is whether there has been a
problem with products being released with a
Listing mark from a test lab that does not have
NRTL approval for the standard being certified
when that standard is covered by the NRTL? In
other words, have any AHJs accepted products with
meaningless Listing marks for products covered
under the NRTL program?

 

 

Ted Eckert

Microsoft Corporation

 

The opinions expressed are my own and do not
necessarily reflect those of my employer.

 

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 5:47 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

I need to read the 2017 edition as well. 

 

Requiring NRTL simply seems wrong, if only because
not all appliance standards are available under
the NRTL program
https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/list_standards
.html. 

 

I am presently working on certifying a UL 1973
product and will have to settle for the agency
monogram but no NRT

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-23 Thread Cortland Richmond


On 7/23/2016 10:07 AM, Brian Gregory wrote:
Another is to research Home Depot's buyer's guide:  I believe they 
somewhere say in writing that they'll not sell non-approved plug-in 
appliances.


They do, however, readily sell DIY FCC-non-compliant lighting fixtures.

Cortland Richmond

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion 
list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-23 Thread Brian Gregory

 Let's also remember that there are categories of Listed products at companies 
like UL, CSA and Intertek:  including 'recognized' and 'approved.'   The 
difference is out of scope for this discussion.  The proper phrase from a legal 
standpoint IMO, should be approved and not "listed."  As such, listed, 
recognized or approved, are all "approved" appliances.  It's what I always 
used. I'll say that AHJ's aren't often in the position of inspecting plugged-in 
units,  My experience suggests that only happens when there's been some sort of 
problem, and also the person who has had an AHJ called on them is likely the 
type who's too lazy to unplug things and generally tidy up for an inspection. 
In regards to Mr. Eckert's question: "whether there has been a problem with 
products being released with a Listing mark from a test lab that does not have 
NRTL approval" When I worked at an NRTL, a story circulated (veracity never 
verified, but useful for hawking testing services) about a person in Oregon who 
purchased a non-approved exercise stroller appliance from overseas via the 
Internet.  It subsequently caught fire and burned the house down. The story 
goes that the insurance company found out all about the source of the fire, and 
thence in either its by-laws or state code a prohibition of non-approved 
appliances and was able to legally refuse payment. So, that's an example.  
Another is to research Home Depot's buyer's guide:  I believe they somewhere 
say in writing that they'll not sell non-approved plug-in appliances. happy 
weekend all, Colorado Brian 

-- Original Message --
From: Ted Eckert <07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 16:08:54 +


I concur with Mr. Perkins assessment. The NEC has used the term 
Listed for quite a while without specifically connecting it to 
the NRTL program. It only had to be a Listing acceptable to the 
local AHJ, which almost always meant NRTL Listed. I believe the intent of is to 
clarify the intent of current practice.
 
In regards to Mr. Powells comments; the AHJ will normally sign off 
before many plug-connected appliances are installed. Most of the AHJ inspection 
will cover appliances attached to building structure which are largely covered 
by the NRTL program. There are installations where this will be a problem as 
noted below. However, I dont expect most AHJs to know which products are 
covered by the NRTL program and which are not. The AHJ will likely accept an 
approval mark by a test lab in the NRTL program even if that test lab 
doesnt have the standard for that product within the scope of their NRTL 
registration. 
 
The question I have is whether there has been a problem with products being 
released with a Listing mark from a test lab that does not have NRTL approval 
for the standard being certified when that standard is covered by the NRTL? In 
other words, have any AHJs accepted products with meaningless Listing marks for 
products covered under the NRTL program?
 
 
Ted Eckert
Microsoft Corporation
 
The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer.
 
From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 5:47 AM
 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
 
I need to read the 2017 edition as well. 
 
Requiring NRTL simply seems wrong, if only because not all appliance standards 
are available under the NRTL program 
https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/list_standards.html. 
 
I am presently working on certifying a UL 1973 product and will have to settle 
for the agency monogram but no NRTL. I am certain there are many more product 
types like this.  
 
In addition, the first 1/4th of that listing of standards are not UL standards 
at all. It would seem that if OSHA is able to understand this nuance, then NFPA 
and AHJs should be able to understand this as well.  
 
All the best, Doug
 
Douglas E Powell
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
 
 
 
 
From: Pete Perkins
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 11:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Reply To: Pete Perkins
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
 
Dave, et al,. 
This is not a new requirement for the NEC.  In the past the NEC 
required that all equipment be Labeled [Art 100 definition] by an organization 
acceptable to the AHJ indicating compliance with appropriate standards ...  The 
Handbook explanation also adds a reference to  Art 90.7 which  is an 
examination of equipment for safety.  
 
I haven't read the 2017 NEC but you claim that NRTL has been added.  If 
so, I'm not surprised as this is just a clarification to what has been 
understood for years.  
As has been discussed before, Americans are quick to promulgate rules 
but reluctant to spend anything on enforcement.  OSHA invokes the NRTL cert 
requirement for equipment used in the workplace.   Other enf

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-22 Thread Nyffenegger, Dave

I attended an NFPA webinar this week that indicated this.  I’m waiting for them 
to publish the offline slides to look at.  I think they also said the 2017 
edition is not finalized yet.

-Dave

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 6:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

Thanks,  Doug

Douglas E Powell
Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com<mailto:doug...@gmail.com>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute 
<ri...@ieee.org<mailto:ri...@ieee.org>> wrote:

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

Rich

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org<mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org<mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org<mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org<mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald dhe...@gmail.com<mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>

--

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com<mailto:doug...@gmail.com>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org<mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org<mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org<mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org<mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com<mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-22 Thread Doug Powell

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

Thanks,  Doug


Douglas E Powell
Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute  wrote:

>
>
>
>
> The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state
> AHJs.  In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and
> add some requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what
> “listing” means – what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local
> or state AHJ.  The NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party
> certifier.
>
>
>
> AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state
> rules.  A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently
> acceptable.
>
>
>
> Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how
> the local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as
> does OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives
> than OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rich
>
>
>
>
> -
> 
>
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
> emc-p...@ieee.org
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
> Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
> Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
> unsubscribe) 
> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org
> Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org
> David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
>



-- 

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-22 Thread Richard Nute

 

 

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.  

 

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.  

 

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

 

 

Rich

 

 


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-22 Thread Ted Eckert

I concur with Mr. Perkin’s assessment. The NEC has used the term “Listed” for 
quite a while without specifically connecting it to the NRTL program. It only 
had to be a “Listing” acceptable to the local AHJ, which almost always meant 
NRTL Listed. I believe the intent of is to clarify the intent of current 
practice.

In regards to Mr. Powell’s comments; the AHJ will normally sign off before many 
plug-connected appliances are installed. Most of the AHJ inspection will cover 
appliances attached to building structure which are largely covered by the NRTL 
program. There are installations where this will be a problem as noted below. 
However, I don’t expect most AHJs to know which products are covered by the 
NRTL program and which are not. The AHJ will likely accept an approval mark by 
a test lab in the NRTL program even if that test lab doesn’t have the standard 
for that product within the scope of their NRTL registration.

The question I have is whether there has been a problem with products being 
released with a Listing mark from a test lab that does not have NRTL approval 
for the standard being certified when that standard is covered by the NRTL? In 
other words, have any AHJs accepted products with meaningless Listing marks for 
products covered under the NRTL program?


Ted Eckert
Microsoft Corporation

The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer.

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 5:47 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

I need to read the 2017 edition as well.

Requiring NRTL simply seems wrong, if only because not all appliance standards 
are available under the NRTL program 
https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/list_standards.html.

I am presently working on certifying a UL 1973 product and will have to settle 
for the agency monogram but no NRTL. I am certain there are many more product 
types like this.

In addition, the first 1/4th of that listing of standards are not UL standards 
at all. It would seem that if OSHA is able to understand this nuance, then NFPA 
and AHJs should be able to understand this as well.

All the best, Doug

Douglas E Powell
‎https://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01


‎

From: Pete Perkins
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 11:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Reply To: Pete Perkins
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017



Dave, et al,.

This is not a new requirement for the NEC.  In the past the NEC 
required that all equipment be Labeled [Art 100 definition] by an organization 
acceptable to the AHJ indicating compliance with appropriate standards ...  The 
Handbook explanation also adds a reference to Art 90.7 which  is an examination 
of equipment for safety.



I haven't read the 2017 NEC but you claim that NRTL has been added.  If 
so, I'm not surprised as this is just a clarification to what has been 
understood for years.

As has been discussed before, Americans are quick to promulgate rules 
but reluctant to spend anything on enforcement.  OSHA invokes the NRTL cert 
requirement for equipment used in the workplace.  Other enforcement is mixed; 
much enforcement is primarily left to the legal system in that any manufacturer 
that has a serious problem with a product that causes harm will have to hang 
their head in shame and admit that the product doesn't even meet the minimum 
safety requirements for that class of products.  Under the present conditions 
it seems that the manufacturer would end up paying maybe U$ 2Million if someone 
dies from the product deficiency.  At what level does this become an incentive 
to the manufacturer to get the product NRTL approved?  If you have a number in 
mind I bet that the ambulance chasing lawyers would like to use it in their 
claims for damage.

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

p.perk...@ieee.org<mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org>

-Original Message-
From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 2:55 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] NEC 2017

The 2017 NEC will require all appliances to be NRTL listed.  I wonder how that 
will be enforced?  Individual states  adopt the NEC into law.   I don't know 
what the actual state statutes look like for the current NEC, I imagine 
specific statutes would need to be written to deal with this new requirement, 
assuming the states adopt it.  Doesn't make sense to enforce that on the 
consumer/owner on the manner that OSHA enforces workplace compliance on the 
workplace owner.   Appliances present during a AHJ inspection could be checked 
but that would be a very small percentage of appliances.  The requirement would 
have to be put on the in-state retailers which probably couldn't be

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-22 Thread Doug Powell

Title: RE: [PSES] NEC 2017
  I need to read the 2017 edition as well. Requiring NRTL simply seems wrong, if only because not all appliance standards are available under the NRTL program https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/list_standards.html. I am presently working on certifying a UL 1973 product and will have to settle for the agency monogram but no NRTL. I am certain there are many more product types like this.  In addition, the first 1/4th of that listing of standards are not UL standards at all. It would seem that if OSHA is able to understand this nuance, then NFPA and AHJs should be able to understand this as well.   All the best, DougDouglas E Powellâhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 âFrom: Pete PerkinsSent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 11:46 PMTo: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGReply To: Pete PerkinsSubject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017









Dave, et al,.  

    This is not a new requirement for the NEC.  In the past the NEC required that all equipment be Labeled [Art 100 definition] by an organization acceptable to the AHJ indicating compliance with appropriate standards ...  The Handbook explanation also adds a reference to Art 90.7 which  is an examination of equipment for safety.  

 

    I haven't read the 2017 NEC but you claim that NRTL has been added.  If so, I'm not surprised as this is just a clarification to what has been understood for years.  

    As has been discussed before, Americans are quick to promulgate rules but reluctant to spend anything on enforcement.  OSHA invokes the NRTL cert requirement for equipment used in the workplace.  Other enforcement is mixed; much enforcement is primarily left to the legal system in that any manufacturer that has a serious problem with a product that causes harm will have to hang their head in shame and admit that the product doesn't even meet the minimum safety requirements for that class of products.  Under the present conditions it seems that the manufacturer would end up paying maybe U$ 2Million if someone dies from the product deficiency.  At what level does this become an incentive to the manufacturer to get the product NRTL approved?  If you have a number in mind I bet that the ambulance chasing lawyers would like to use it in their claims for damage.  

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

p.perk...@ieee.org



-Original Message-
From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 2:55 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] NEC 2017

The 2017 NEC will require all appliances to be NRTL listed.  I wonder how that will be enforced?  Individual states  adopt the NEC into law.   I don't know what the actual state statutes look like for the current NEC, I imagine specific statutes would need to be written to deal with this new requirement, assuming the states adopt it.  Doesn't make sense to enforce that on the consumer/owner on the manner that OSHA enforces workplace compliance on the workplace owner.   Appliances present during a AHJ inspection could be checked but that would be a very small percentage of appliances.  The requirement would have to be put on the in-state retailers which probably couldn't be enforced on out of state shippers the same way that collecting sales tax from out of state shippers is challenged.   Perhaps it could be made to apply to manufacturers within the state.  Perhaps it can be enforced at the federal level for imports that have to clear customs.

-Dave

-



This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas <sdoug...

[PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-21 Thread Nyffenegger, Dave

The 2017 NEC will require all appliances to be NRTL listed.  I wonder how that 
will be enforced?  Individual states  adopt the NEC into law.   I don't know 
what the actual state statutes look like for the current NEC, I imagine 
specific statutes would need to be written to deal with this new requirement, 
assuming the states adopt it.  Doesn't make sense to enforce that on the 
consumer/owner on the manner that OSHA enforces workplace compliance on the 
workplace owner.   Appliances present during a AHJ inspection could be checked 
but that would be a very small percentage of appliances.  The requirement would 
have to be put on the in-state retailers which probably couldn't be enforced on 
out of state shippers the same way that collecting sales tax from out of state 
shippers is challenged.   Perhaps it could be made to apply to manufacturers 
within the state.  Perhaps it can be enforced at the federal level for imports 
that have to clear customs.

-Dave

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

[PSES] NEC 2017

20 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information